Who benefits most when you are prescribed a drug? How many chronic conditions has conventional medicine cured?
Do you know what's in your medicine? Be proactive in your approach to your health.
We are not made up of pharmaceutical drugs - so they are not always the answer to long term health. Pills can help,but they shouldn't be the first and only option.
A healthy external environment and living in a non fear based world makes for better health.

Tuesday, 29 January 2013

'The devastating changes that turn healthy tissue into cancer
are to be investigated in the biggest centre of its kind in the NHS.

The laboratories at the Institute of Cancer Research (ICR)
will use information in tumour DNA to help find the best "personalised"
treatments.

Its director said this was not science fiction and would be
day-to-day practice in the NHS within a decade.

The centre will also investigate how cancers become
resistant to drugs.

The field of cancer research is moving rapidly away from
defining a cancer by where it is in the body - one type of breast cancer can
have more in common with an ovarian cancer than another cancer in the breast.'

So reports the BBC.

The report went on to say...

'Instead scientists and doctors are looking
deeper at what is going wrong inside cancerous cells - a tumour can have
100,000 genetic mutations and these alter over time.One
great challenge with cancer treatment is resistance. Promising drugs suddenly
fail after a few months'Well this is all very fine and noble but how many times and ways are there to keep looking at the tumour. This is like looking at a broken leg and trying to understand why the bone broke and how the bone developed and may develop as it heals, but still the bones keep breaking because no one fixed the environmental cause - a broken path or removed the obstacle on the stairs that everyone trips over - pick any analogy you like.Google the 'Town of Allopath' and the shortest little animation explains the big problem.Now of course we all want that breakthrough in cancer 'cure' and of course the drug companies I'm sure can't wait to come up with another batch or drugs that the medical profession agree in this statement, have limited ability to work over time. So more and more drugs are not the answer when you are purely focusing on the tumour, no matter how specialised they seem.The tumour is the bodies way of encapsulating the problem. What we need to do is to focus on the environment that the tumour has grown in.No good keep looking at the plant to see why it died and never checking the soil.We have to really stack the odds in our favour if we want good health, nothing is guaranteed, but the better the odds we give ourselves the healthier lives we lead for longer.It is well known that cancer cells live better in bodies with less oxygen. They like acid bodies, and as most people walk around with very acidic systems, we are giving the cancer cells one of their most favourite conditions.We can change that with an alkaline diet. Most of the western world has a very acid rich diet.Cancer cells love sugar....there is a treatment for cancer which utilises this knowledge and starves the body, then injects glucose and a small dose of chemo - the cancer cells want that glucose, and suck it up quicker than healthy cells, taking the chemo to the cells also.That is a clever way to treat it, less damage to healthy cells, but the point is we know then cancer cells love sugar and need it to thrive - cut its food source off then and don't forget the hidden sugars.

Again we have very sugar laden diets in the west.Cancer cells die at 41 degrees C, so lets use the heat treatments that are out there.Vitamin C - an incredibly toxic substance to cancer cells. So why are we not looking more closely at the injection of Vit C into the blood or into the tumour. These ideas are out there and being used, but not widespread.Instead its the same old route and the numbers continue to grow.We can look all we like at how tumours develop, but if we change the environment then we make it harder for them to grow and sustain.If cancer has developed, something has gone wrong, what ever you have done to that point needs to change.

The long term answer to health is not a pill.Cancer cells don't develop due to lack of pills. The human body has not evolved with the knowledge that drugs will be needed.We have tried drugs, investigating DNA coding/genetics , more drugs etc etc, but we haven't tried nutrition and environmental medicine.Now why is that?Are we all lazy and can't be bothered to make lifestyle changes?Have we come to rely on the fact we can seemingly do as we please and a doctor will fix it?- well that doesn't happen, unless you want the same problem returning time and time again.May be the answer to avoiding cancer and fixing it should it occur - doesn't need a great big centre at what cost, or more researchers or doctors or drug companies - may be each of us as individuals can do all of that for ourselves.Your body is that 'centre' you are your own researcher, every time you shop, you can choose ingredients that will help you or you can choose those that won't and none of us need a medical degree to make that choice.The internet is full of info - explore them yourself, look at the studies , lots of them.After all, Dr's google things all the time, or they work on what drug companies tell them.It's your health. Cancer is not a disease that pops up over night and needs the A & E team, its a long term condition that has grown up over time, so start to get it into reverse and don't make it easy for it to develop.Check in with your emotional body. Many cancers develop after emotional trauma - it's not easy living life, so do the things that make you happy, keep the thoughts positive. Exercise and relax. It can help hugely.

Dr Nina Bailey from the Igennus nutrition company
in Cambridge, who will talk on the link of ‘Breast Cancer and Dietary Fat’ and
reducing inflammation in the body.

Mr Bill Bradford from Meditherm, who will be
demonstrating how Thermography is a safe way of detecting breast problems.

Mr David Stevens, author of the 'Every Woman's Guide
to Vital Breast Health' book, will be speaking about his success in treating
women with breast cancer and what we can all do to help ourselves maintain
healthy breast tissue.

A local nurse will also be there to
talk about self examination of the breasts.

Further details on our
website www.cichealth.org.uk

Refreshments included midway and a
chance to chat to our speakers

Entry for the event is
just £10 in advance or £12 on the night. To book your place either email us at
cambconf@gmail.com or call Maddy Tel 01223 572316 or Sarah Tel 01223 514601 or Mob 07508031269

Retirement Collection for the ‘Yes to Life’ charity

Yes to Life offers
support to people with cancer who want to take a proactive role in their
treatment. Yes to Life helps open up choices, and supports people in finding a
way forward that is right for them.

Saturday, 19 January 2013

There is a belief held by some that cancer doesn't exist. I have had this view expressed to me several times in the last few months and especially when we were preparing for the cancer convention. One group of people thought they couldn't spread the information about that event, as they firmly believed that cancer doesn't exist.

Now the reasons behind some of this thinking are a little conspiratorial for me, but the concept of it not existing is a good one, but that concept then is not just limited to cancer.

What we do know for sure is that people get sick, some get so sick their physical body can no longer cope and they die.

We can see & log the symptoms displayed during the illness and clients/patients report how they feel and the effects they experience.

We can even test to see if the body is producing too much of something or not enough of something according to the parameters set for what we are told, is 'correct functioning' which of course would be someone who is symptom free and feeling well and balanced for that individual.
Thyroxine for example, too much or too little and a certain set of symptoms may manifest to varying degrees.

We know that our bodies need certain levels of vitamins and minerals, so we can test for those too, again the levels needed are those that give that individual correct functioning and the feeling of wellness, health and vitality

With the technology we have available at present, we can establish damage or inflammation in the body.

These factors are then grouped together and are named.

So we have characteristics combined with certain measurables and the recognising of this by some Dr perhaps leads and has led, to this to be defined by a name, perhaps after the Dr himself or a characteristic of the disease.

We are of course people of verbal/written communication and want to share our knowledge thankfully, so a definition is needed. It helps keep us all in the same ball park.

I say ballpark because along with a defined criteria for the now named condition, there are of course variables on the edge of that and we would perhaps liken the effect of those on how severe the illness presents, but as long as the patient ticks most of the already defined boxes, they can have a diagnosis of their condition and they are then labelled as having what ever the illness has been called.

Well its a starting point for anyone treating that person to begin from. It leads you down a certain route of medication or other treatments that have been shown to help the symptoms that others similar to themselves have displayed.

Pharmaceutical companies produce drugs specific for certain symptoms and again a prescribing practitioner will rightly look to one batch of drugs opposed to another.

Naturopathic practitioners will do the same, certain herbs, oils, remedies, etc have, over the course of time, shown to be effective in addressing certain symptoms will perhaps be those first considered.

All of the above is what happens every time you consult a health professional when you are not well. In some way I am merely stating the obvious, but I do so to make this point.

We name illness to help us treat it or its symptoms.

To our bodies, it is just a series of things that have gone wrong. This, that and the other are no longer working properly and have resulted in a set of symptoms.

It doesn't care what we call it. So yes, cancer or any other name is just that - a name!

What our bodies are more interested in is fixing the root cause and that might be the bit we can't define or include in that 'tick box' list that leads to the named diagnosis.
I am tempted here to write 'route cause'

We get sick for a variety of reasons. Take stress as one of them. Stress causes inflammation in the body, inflammation can lead to a variety of health problems, it could manifest in all sorts of ways depending on the individual at the time.

So I can see why people take a view that diseases on one level don't exist, in the named form we give them, but we must all accept that the factors that start ill health do and it is these elements that are more important in addressing than just symptom treating.
These are often as individual as the person that suffers the resulting symptoms, so if you put that aspect into the equation of illness definition, you would have at least 7 billion definitions every time.

Not possible to work in a clinical definition/understanding way, but an extremely important part in the 'getting well' aspect of addressing the root/route cause.

So we think we have seen this set of symptoms before but have we seen this cause before or this accumulation of causes and do we know what that cause is?

Address the cause and you have a far better chance of gaining health, no matter what anyone wants to call your dis-ease.

When we name a disease, all sorts of predictions of its path quickly follow and set in our minds, often generating a fear, cancer being one of those, MS, another perhaps. That fear is never helpful to healing. We need only desire.....the desire to get well and the desire to change that root/route.

So don't let a 'name' engender fear, after all your body has no concept of a diagnosis, just things that need you to do your best to address its ill-ease.

Friday, 18 January 2013

Whichever
your chosen discipline under this vast umbrella is, it is a good idea to start
with a Diploma in Anatomy and Physiology. It can also help to study Pathology
at Diploma level also.

It is a good
grounding and some courses will combine these alongside the teaching of the
actual therapy as well.

To practice
any therapy commercially, you need at least a diploma level and be sure that it
is a ‘level 3’ or above course . Level 4 being degree standard.

In the UK,
you can study courses that are known as VTCT, which is a vocational training
organisation, City and Guilds or ITEC.

There are also independent training
schools and as long as their courses are recognised as matching the National
Occupational Standard guidelines, you will know they are of good quality.

That
said, some private courses and training centres are also excellent and it is
best to make sure that if you go down this track, that you can get insurance to
practice, which the training establishment should have ensured.

In the
beginning like many subjects, a strong desire to learn and a passion for the
subject is a good start. Some colleges may ask for a certain number of exams,
but as most of these courses are for adults, life experience counts for a lot.

Some
disciplines take 2-3 years of study, others 1 year and then advancements on top
of that. Once qualified in one major modality, shorter courses are available.

Getting a
recommendation of a place of study is good or the name of a tutor you would
like to study under and find out their lineage.

After all, the establishment may have a fine set
up, but it is the knowledge of the tutor and their experience in teaching and
perhaps more importantly that of their practical application and successes in
treating that will be passed on to you. So make sure your tutor has plenty of
hands on experience and has not just become classroom bound.

If you are
taking a chemotherapy route, then it is worth considering what herbal remedies
can support the liver as it copes with the toxicity of the chemo drugs and what
you can do to support the healthy cells as many chemo drugs attack all cells
indiscriminately including the healthy ones.

Milk Thistle can help support the liver

It is
important to support the digestive tract as well. Herbalism, homeopathy,
nutrition are considerations. Slippery elm is certainly one to consider. One should always consult an expert on the
subject and one that has supported people through such an illness in the past.
It is all about informed choice so you know what your options are and what
success there has been.

In my view, we are not treating the cancer, we are treating the person.

If you are
an adult, you are free to choose whatever route you feel appropriate and there
are many well documented cases that show those following only a complementary
route to treat themselves get better.

Some people will opt for a totally
complementary therapeutic route and will use just the scanning/screening from
the health service; others will take only the conventional chemotherapy,
radiotherapy and surgical route.

Many though,
seek to combine both. No matter what a therapists personal view on this is, we
would seek to support that person in whatever form they want their treatment to
take.

It is more
important that the client/patient is happy with their decision as trust in
whoever is treating you is shown to be a big part in its success.

If you are a
child of course, a recent case in the uk has highlighted that it is not as
simple as a parent making the decision on the treatment of their child, but
this can be and has been challenged in the courts if the medical establishment
wishes to and if they see it as in the child’s best interest, regardless of
parental view on health.

Many
oncology units offer complementary therapy treatments to help with the stress
of coping with the illness and of course this is very important to help people
relax as much as possible. These are usually in the form of aromatherapy and
reflexology, but it’s a start. At least people are no longer told that massage
can spread cancer, which was once the belief of the medical establishment and
an enigma to those that practised it.

A
complementary medical route will tend to engage the person in improving their
own health and addressing the reasons the problem occurred.

It of course is
crucial to look at diet and nutrition, and work involving Vit C in treating
cancer is also worth looking at, Vit D levels as another factor.

Alkalising
the body and the use of oxygen would also help. Cancer thrives in acid bodies
and the vast majority of cancers do not like a good oxygenated systems. So
exercise and nutrition along with whatever therapy is your chosen one to help
you to relax and promote health in your body, surely has to be considered
whatever route you take.

I give this article this particular title so that It gives me an opportunity to state very clearly that no
complementary therapist can claim to treat cancer. That would contravene the
1939Cancer Act.

In fact we don’t need to even think about treating the cancer. What
complementary medicine does and can do very well is to address the situation in
which the cancer developed. So we would look to resolve the health of the
entire body and change the environment the cancer developed in.

No one takes
this or any illness lightly, but this one sadly strikes fear into those with a
diagnosis. A good practitioner would not be under the illusion that this is
easy to address as again it has probably developed for a variety of reasons and
different for everyone. But one thing is for sure, it hasn't developed due to a
lack of chemotherapy drugs or radiotherapy in the body.

To my mind,
finding the right therapist you are happy with and giving you the most suitable
treatment, then therapies are extremely effective in helping to restore health.

We are never
allowed to talk of cure but if you have a condition and you have treatments and
you don’t have the symptoms after, then I guess it has worked!

Therapists
have to be very careful to make claims that they don’t treat specific
conditions also, but again, therapies work to address dis-ease in the body, you
can’t make only one part well, it all has to be well for good health to be
restored and complementary medicine is a very holistic approach to the body.

How long lasting is it?

How long is
a piece of string? Given that people very often are told they need to take
certain medication for life, even those that are just thought to be
preventative, which of course we never know if they are, then complementary
medicine is the same. You do it until you feel better and then very often
people may build a maintenance programme into their life to help them keep as
well as they can.

It is all
about stacking the deck in your favour.

A therapist
will have more time to look at your lifestyle and see what might be
contributing to the ill health or problem. It then requires the client/patient
to make the changes alongside the treatments. If what you have done up to that
point has led to a problem, then you have to change it, if not the problem
remains.

Keep doing
what you always do and you get what you always got! Be guided to another way
and you end up with a better result – health and good well being!

Looking for a therapist that has experience
in treating your condition is of course the first question you might ask.

With most
things in life, word of mouth is the best recommendation. And that is how most
people find me. But if that isn't possible, ask lots of questions when you call
a practitioner. Are they a member of a recognised organisation such as the
Federation of Holistic Therapists? Are they insured?

I don’t
think experience in terms of years in the business is always relevant. Newly
qualified practitioners have experience during their college training and will
have plenty of recent experience and training.

Those more
senior in the industry hopefully will also have kept up their CPD so will be aware
of new methods and thinking etc. So may be asking if they do continual skill
enhancement in their work.

A good
practitioner will not mind answering your questions, they will know that it is
important for the client to be happy to trust them and therefore relaxed in
sharing confidential and personal information with them.

Sometimes it
may be that you don’t get on with the therapist you first find, that doesn't matter, there will be one that is right for you. That is no problem to the therapist. A professional
therapist will understand that and will want what is right for you.

Again, much
like in the surgery, patients always prefer one GP over the others.

This is a
good question and lends itself to the diversity of therapies that are out
there.

If you are
looking to treat allergies, CKT or chirokinetic therapy is very effective as
would addressing the immune system through vitamins.

Aromatherapy
and herbalism are very good for hormonal problems and digestion problems, but
again, they too can be used for a variety of illnesses as well. Herbalism is
the oldest form of medicine and thus can tackle a multitude of illnesses by
addressing the root cause. Aromatherapy will impact chemically on the body as
well, and used alongside massage, can also alleviate muscular pains etc .

It is
limitless what complementary medicine can do to help restore health and
balance.

It is almost
impossible to declare what is best as it is for the exploration of the
individual.

It may be
that you try a few to see what has the best affinity with your body. You have
to give whatever you try, a few sessions to see the difference. I equate it to
medicine, that there may well be a range of pills that treat the same
condition, some you react well to and others you don’t. Beta blockers are a
good example of this. You also wouldn't take a pill once and declare it a
failure; you need to see how it responds over time.

I think it
is absolutely right that people do whatever they feel will help them to better
health and if that is using complementary medicine alongside allopathic
medicine then I see no problem in this. All forms of medicine should be working
to the same end, and no one route may be enough, so the allopathic route may
help the symptoms while the complementary route, may address the cause, or vice
versa. Usually the first of those is the way.

Therapies
work very well together and will be addressing problems in a different way, but
the ultimate reason for using either method must be solely for the restoration
of health to the best it can be for the person concerned.

Doctors have
the ultimate responsibility for their patients’ health but because many have little
or no knowledge of complementary medicine, it is unfair for a patient to ask
the doctor for their opinion if they should combine the two. It is also wrong
for a complementary therapist acting in that role to dissuade a patient to not
seek their doctors’ advice.

It is also
very wrong for either approach to denigrate the people involved in that persons
care. Many doctors will view complementary medicine as quackery, but I think
you only have to ask the many that use it as either the only option or as a
complement to the standard approach and they vote with their feet.

It of course
would be so much better if the two approaches conversed with mutual respect.

Very often
people will seek a different approach, when they have felt that the methods we
are more use to have not worked for them or have not worked in the way they had
hoped. Perhaps the side effects were worse than the condition, and for an
increasing number of people, they seek a method that will work in harmony with
the body and are not harsh medical interventions as a first option.

A lot of
people try them on the recommendation of friends that have had successful
outcomes.

I think that
when it comes to the need for accident and emergency or surgery, then of course
the health service is superb and it is just what is needed, but for the long term
chronic conditions, there are people who feel disillusioned with the approach
and they also seek to see what else there is to help.

This is people taking responsibility for their
health too, and seeking the right approach for them, perhaps realising that
they didn’t get ill through lack of a pill but that something fundamental is
askew and on a level that complementary medicine has the subtlety to address

Complementary
medicine to my thinking, are modalities that complement the body and therefore
the health of the body.

It is the
option of treatments that work in harmony with the body, perhaps initiating the
body’s own healing ability or using natural remedies and not synthetic chemical
based medicines

There are a vast spectrum of therapies that would come under this umbrella.

Many people
are aware of treatments such as Aromatherapy, Reflexology, and Acupuncture. Complementary Medicine includes so many
therapies, such as Chiropractic, Osteopathy, Reiki, Kinesiology, Shiatsu,
Cranial-Sacral, Herbalism, Homeopathy, Massage, etc

Some
treatments involve direct manipulation of the body, often subtly and others
include the adding of substances such as herbalism, aromatherapy, homeopathy.
Then there are the therapies that change the resonances of the body - energy
fields or meridians, so Acupuncture, Cranial Sacral, Reiki and Crystal Therapies would come under this

Of course I have
no way exhausted the list and it is this range of therapies that is the
strength of complementary medicine, but can also lead to its criticism.

But we are
all individuals and having been a practising therapist for some years now, I
fully accept that what works wonders for one, doesn't for another. This is no
different from allopathic medicine, where there can be several pills for one condition,
one pill suits and another doesn't.

Saturday, 5 January 2013

How easy is to make the right decision for the good of your own health?

It seems that we are bombarded every day with some advice from the media, either red wine is good for us, and next it isn't. Low salt, low fat etc etc. But we have to bear in mind that this is nothing more than an opinion often based on some published study that may or may not truly be reflective of the truth. They can sometimes be nothing more than a 'cherry picked' study for the headline it can generate.

But a vast amount of people still believe that if it is written in the press, then it must be true.
This can be a dangerous view to hold and very often the story is a few paragraphs and contains very little, certainly one should check if the info is correct or what the counter evidence is before you use it to make changes to your eating habits or lifestyle.

By checking i mean research a bit, not just seeing the same story twice but in another newspaper, that is just lazy journalism and pooling of stories, with no new perspective. It might seem like a throw away story in some ways, but in this day of age where people are always looking to live longer, keep healthier etc, these stories can have big impacts.

A lot of people I see in my practise tell me that they stopped eating this or that after they read it in the papers, salt being the best example.

When this story raises its head as it does quite often, it is never mentioned what sort of salt.
Is it the 'industrial waste' we generally know as table salt, which is the most common form of salt found in most kitchens I'm sure (although hopefully only for putting on the icy paths!) or is it good sea salt or Himalayan rock salt, which can help and not hinder our health.
Most of the ready meals are probably using table salt and not sea salt, because if they are, I'm sure they will state that as a selling point, like the inclusion of 'free range eggs' on packaging as some consumers are looking for this.

Then there is the '5' a day. It is thought we should be eating 5 fruit and veg portions a day, well that's all good, except if that is all fruit, that's a lot of sugar (fructose) there are views that too much sugar causes inflammation in the body and this can lead to bigger health problems. So perhaps we should be making most of the 5, vegetables and why 5? why not 7, 9 etc, surely the more the better.
Variety is essential and so is the way it is cooked or that may be some should be raw. No point 5 portions of veg that have been boiled to death and the vitamin content evaporated away.

Then the red wine issue, first it is good for us, then it isn't...well all alcohol is on the top list of carcinogenics, but do you see it being banned? You would want to see the science behind a claim that makes the benefits of red wine greater than the fact it sits high on the list of carcinogenics, but i guess it doesn't exist.

Then of course, most of us have a tendency to think that a little of what you fancy does you good, and that could be true too. If you believe that what you are doing or eating/drinking is good for you, then perhaps your body believes it. Who might want to try that out with a diet of Big Macs and alcohol, in the firm believe that it will do you no harm? May be in the short term, if a study was taken, it just may show no ill effect, especially if we cherry pick the study that shows that and not one that didn't and that unfortunately happens, only when it happens with drugs, we might be in more trouble than with food.

It's the long term effects on our bodies we have to consider. Your body performs the same functions day in and day out regardless of what you put in it - the nutrients and vitamins and amino acids in your diet that are the building blocks and repair kit for your health, so if you miss a day, you never get it back.

So these stories of food that are good one one minute and not the next should not make you alter your diet unless you know more than is usually written.

Lets consider water...we are all told to drink more water - excellent if you are the supplier of bottled water. ( worth remembering who commissions the studies) Bottled water has to be the biggest scam going. How long has that water been sitting in a plastic bottle absorbing all the chemicals in the plastic. The softer the plastic the more likely the leakage of the chemicals. These are shown to alter the oestrogen levels in women, and yet it is mostly women that carry around bottles of water as we are told we need to drink more. These bottles get hot and cold and as they heat up, so you potentially increase chemical leakage.

It may be that you do need more water, but water on its own will dilute the salts in the body and the body needs salt for a variety of functions.

I quote here from the Essential guide to Water and Salt (F. Batmanghelidj MD and Phillip Day)

Salt is essential for sleep, helps balance sugar levels in the body - so a vital element to be considered in diabetes, It is vital for the communication and information processing of the nervous system. It helps food absorption and most of us will know that we need it when our muscles cramp and spasm. It helps build strong bones and can help prevent varicose veins. The list is not endless but it is certainly long.
Now of course it doesn't mean salt in excess and it doesn't mean industrial waste table salt.
Batmanghelidj and Day conclude that 3grams of salt for every 10 glasses of water is required if you are going to ensure that drinking more water won't have a negative effect by washing out all the essential salts from the body.

So the media's two favourite health stories, 'Drink more water' and 'Eat less Salt' could in fact have very unfavourable consequences over time especially if you believe and follow both.

Then there is the 'low fat' Should we really be eating margarine's? I think most of us know by now that our bodies cope with natural fats and can process these better than man made fats. There are so many excellent explanations on the Internet now, many given by medics and I viewed one recently by a pharmacist, that shows it is not the animal fat that is causing cholesterol (I have blogged before on the cholesterol myth so will not repeat it) but it is damage to the arteries that requires our bodies cholesterol to be needed to fill the gaps, and so we should be looking at reducing damage in the first place, now that can be through lessening stress and avoiding 'table salt' which can have a scraping effect on your artery walls in a way that sea salt and rock salt does not.
I'm also sure that most know that its not fat that makes us fat, but sugar.

Rise in body weight - look to corn syrup and sugar!

Fat is protective to our cell walls and necessary for the production of hormones and the transportation of hormones and vitamins (Vit D and E esp) Hormones control just about everything in our bodies in some way or other, so do we really need less of it?

Many people follow low fat diets and buy the appropriate food, if they look at it, it more often than not has more sugar! Then they wonder how come they don't lose weight or don't sustain weight loss. Sugar is an inflammatory in the body and not part of our natural eating. Yes we need some.but not in the amounts we consume and then its better if its as natural as possible and not in the highly processed corn syrup form. It can also be overlooked that carbs can turn to sugar.

So next time you see the next food fad that we should eat or avoid, don't react out of fear, investigate and decide.

These days so much info is available to us and we are not getting the best from many newspaper stories, so don't base health decision and food choices that effect your health on this and this alone, just think about the salt and water, follow both sets of advice and you could be quite unwell and not doing the best for yourself.
Remember studies are often 'cherry picked' to show what they want, and often what is not favourable to the desired perspective is missing from the big picture. This can be the case for food and for drugs. lets hope your doctor looks at all studies, both those that are published and those that weren't, before he prescribes.
So take control of your health and check what you eat and what you are given.
Or check a resource that has done that for you already and one that you trust - but don't accept the same story from 2 different newspapers as being proof.

We are first and foremost the product of what we put in our supermarket trolley! What goes in this month, will appear as a skin cell in about 30 days and other cells in longer or lesser time.

About Me

I have been a complementary therapist for well over 15 years or so and a lecturer for 12 but have always worked in the health field and natural health has been my passion all my adult life.
I got involved in the teaching of it and that has been a fantastic experience. Encouraging others in their pursuit of training in many different therapies at all levels.
Creating awareness of just what complementary medicine can do for the body and how it is as much a preventative as it a way of correcting the body.
I co-coordinate a support group for therapists in this area, known as Medella, having co run an FHT support group for 6 years previous. For me, complementary medicine really is my life.
Co founded CICHealth 4 years ago as an umbrella to run much larger health awareness events under. We have now closed that umbrella and that allows me to focus on the teaching. I'm a constant researcher on health, with a special interest in cancer. Every day there is something new to learn and sharing that information and ideas with others is a strong driving force in me. Helping to empower others in their learning or their health choices is a lifelong passion